|
VITOUSEK: So again, this project,the life of this project is very long. We understand that. We-
<br /> -I just feel like it's important to link the projects in a meaningful way where they,where they are
<br /> developed together and enhance one another. So, I think it's important for the development of
<br /> Kumu Hou to have a timeline for the workforce housing requirements as well. But that's
<br /> something that can be you know further considered.
<br /> I do wanna, I do want to point out that, although this project does have quite a bit of community
<br /> benefit, it's still an ask of the county to eliminate open space. No matter what that space, open
<br /> space is occupied with.
<br /> And so, when we are indicating that in our conditions have already been met, like the affordable
<br /> housing conditions for the development have already been met, where other public access
<br /> conditions have already been met, I think it's important to point out that the development has
<br /> changed in order to eliminate a public benefit in open space, and so, therefore, I don't think that it
<br /> is unreasonable for Planning Commissioners and Planning Commission to look at this
<br /> development in light of the current environment and try to understand what conditions can be
<br /> placed on this in order to make sure that we're getting the most benefit out of the project,
<br /> considering the open space that's being given up to allow the project.
<br /> With that, I just, it seemed to me like a lot of the information in the background report regarding
<br /> public access shoreline and beach use was, was pretty limited, given that this isn't an oceanfront
<br /> property. But I think that adding the additional units no matter what amount is going to increase
<br /> the, the shoreline public access because people are coming to Hawai`i to go to the beach,
<br /> primarily, right? So, was there any analysis of whether the current shoreline access provisions
<br /> are adequate? Is there enough parking spaces? Is families able to get to the beach? Is the beach
<br /> space adequate?Are we over-using the resource?And how would that change when we add
<br /> another 900 timeshare units to the area?
<br /> FUKE: Well, I think that, like you know, one thing I'd like to point out is that first, as it relates
<br /> to the workforce housing, I think, was clearly pointed out, both not only by someone within the
<br /> team, but also the staff that the affordable housing obligation has already been fulfilled, and this
<br /> is kind of like separate and apart, you know, the workforce housing is separate and apart from
<br /> the project itself Except as I noted earlier, the project success enables the development of the
<br /> workforce housing and also the funding of the Foundation. We do have a, you've heard from the
<br /> potential developer, which is stamped with Carr's Development that it's difficult to tie a specific
<br /> timetable now on something that's kinda like an optional, but we do have language that
<br /> specifically states that when they have an agreement with the Office of Housing, the
<br /> representations made by the developer will, will have to be codified or at least be addressed, and
<br /> the representations made and your and Mr. Plunkett deal with trying to accelerate the
<br /> construction of this this housing, you know, like ASAP. Also, the provision of the land and the
<br /> required infrastructure, so I would ask that the Commission, you know, consider the fact that
<br /> number one this is optional, and secondly, we still have to work out the details with the Office of
<br /> Housing in terms of fulfilling the representations made today.
<br /> Relative to the question about the public access, the public access portion, and that's why to kind
<br /> of like preface, when the whole project was conceived way back when, you know in 1978, the
<br /> 35
<br /> EXHIBIT D
<br />
|